Religion in the public schools, libraries, etc.

LEGAL CONSIDERATIONS

Sponsored link.

Separation of church and state issues:

While the author was writing this essay, he received an Email about religion in the public schools of
America. It contained many errors and distortions which are shared by many
Americans. The writer of the Email said that the official religion of the U.S. is Atheism,
that God cannot be referred to in the classroom, but that
"ministers" of Atheism are allowed to teach evolution.
In reality, there is no official state religion; the existence of the Christian God can be
mentioned in class, as a belief that many people share. His existence cannot be taught
as a truth for the simple reason that the constitution (as currently
interpreted by the U.S. Supreme Court) requires a separation between
religion and state. Besides, large minorities of people in the
U.S. believe otherwise. Atheistic teachers do teach evolution in
science class. But they are a small minority. School teachers
are probably much like the general adult population
-- about 75% Christian.

Religious teaching in the public schools is limited because of the first phraseof the first Amendment
of the U.S. Constitution -- the establishment clause. It states: "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of
religion..." This clause has been
interpreted by the courts as requiring a wall of separation between church and
state.
That is, the government (and by extension, the public schools) must remain
neutral on religion. As a rough rule of thumb, they may not:

promote one religion or faith group over any other.

promote a religiously based life over a secularly based life.

promote a secularly based life over a religiously based life.

Perhaps the most publicized aspect of this wall of separation is that
the courts have ruled that mandated school prayer within
the classroom is unconstitutional.
If a school board prepared a prayer for its students to recite, it would not
only promote religion over secularism. It would uphold a specific religion - perhaps even a specific division within
a religion. For example, a prayer directed to Jesus Christ would support
religion over secularism and Christianity over other religions. A prayer that also talked about
salvation and the horrors of Hell would
represent
the beliefs of the conservative wing of Christianity. Even a generic prayer
that addressed God in vague terms would be unacceptable, because some
religions and ethical belief systems do not believe in the existence of a personal God;
meanwhile others
believe in multiple deities. Still others believe in a female deity -- a
Goddess. From the students' point of view, mandated prayer
would be seen as evidence that the state sponsors the beliefs and practices of a single faith group.

Meanwhile, the same
Amendment protects students' freedom of religious speech. They are free to take
their Bibles onboard busses, to pray in the
hallways, to say grace before eating, to pray silently in the classroom, to organize Bible clubs
(as long
as other clubs are allowed in the school), to organize prayer
meetings outside the school building, to engage in spontaneous student-led
prayer at sports events, etc.

Teaching about religion in the public schools:

A course about religion or about the Bible can be theoretically taught in
public schools without any constitutional problems, as long as the instruction is objective, inclusive, and
balanced. That may well be an almost impossible goal to achieve:

Some
parents are not willing to have their children taught about the Bible in this way,
because their children would then be exposed to beliefs that the parents
disagreed with. Consider a small example: many conservative Christian parents are taught by their
church that Moses wrote the Pentateuch, the first five books of the
Hebrew Scriptures (Old Testament). They might not be able to accept a
course which mentioned that most theologians believe that the books were
edited from the writings of four anonymous authors.

Some teachers who are devout Jews or Christians will not be able to
avoid some degree of proselytizing

Some instructors might be tempted to present certain beliefs as truth.

In order to meet the first criteria above, the course must maintain neutrality towards
religion. If a school board
teaches about the Bible, it probably should also have courses that
teach about other religious texts: the Qu'ran (Islam),
the Vedas (Hinduism), The Book of Mormon (Mormon),
perhaps even the Urantia Book. Liberal Christian
parents
would probably agree with this degree of inclusiveness; It is doubtful
that conservative Christians would willingly accept it.

Finally, the course must meet the second criteria of the
Establishment Clause. If the school had a course on religion, it would
have to avoid promoting religion over secularism. It is unclear
whether a course about religions of the world would also have to
include information about secularism: i.e. the beliefs of the
non-religious, Agnostics, Atheists, Humanists etc. To our knowledge,
this matter has never been challenged in the courts. To be safe, a
school district might consider:

Incorporating within the religion course beliefs of secularists, such as
Humanists, Atheists, Agnostics, etc., or

Having a second course that describes non-religious approaches to
life, like Humanism, Atheism, Agnosticism, etc.

Although some religious liberals might have no objection to such a
course, it is again doubtful that conservative Christians would accept
it.

All of the discussions about Bible courses in the public schools which
we have seen on the Internet and in the media neglect to discuss many of
these points. But the meaning of the First Amendment appears to be clear:
no promoting of religion over secularism and no promoting of one religion
over another.

Sponsored link:

Reaching a common ground on religion in the schools:

There have been religious conflicts in the public schools since the
19th century, when Protestants and Catholics fought over which biblical translation
would be used during morning prayers. Prayers in the public schools have
since been declared unconstitutional, but religious conflict continues. Some parents
and school officials advocate that public schools become "religion-free" zones.
Others want to see their schools teach the beliefs of their particular wing
of their own religion as truth.

On 1999-NOV-11, Freedom Forum's First Amendment Center and the
National Bible Association announced a booklet which discusses
permissible content of religious education in the public schools. It
is called "The Bible & Public Schools: A First Amendment
Guide." The guide has been endorsed by: the American
Association of School Administrators, American Federation of Teachers,
American Jewish Committee, American Jewish Congress, Anti-Defamation
League, Association for Supervision & Curriculum Development, Baptist
Joint Committee on Public Affairs, Christian Educators
Association International, Christian Legal Society, Council on Islamic
Education, National Association of Evangelicals, National Association of
Secondary School Principals, National Council of Churches of Christ in the
U.S.A., National Council for the Social Studies, National Education
Association, National School Boards Association, People for the American
Way Foundation, Union of American Hebrew Congregations.1

These organizations cover the spectrum from conservative to very
progressive, and include representative groups from the three largest
religions in the U.S.: Christianity, Islam and Judaism.

The guide has been criticized by Ellen Johnson, president of American
Atheists. She said that attempts to teach about the Bible in a
constitutional manner "are fraught with legal and practical
questions. We've been down this road before. It is almost impossible to
use a sectarian book like the Bible in a 'fair' and 'objective' manner in
public schools classrooms. Too many religious groups and teachers
will just exploit the situation and violate the rights of others when it
comes to religious proselytizing." She added that public schools
"already have enough problems with religious activity," and
suggested that the Guide "sets up restrictions and standards that
cannot be adequately enforced." 2

The importance of religion in the curriculum:

Some argue that an
individual cannot be considered fully educated unless she/he is aware of
the overwhelming influence that religion has had on society. As the home
page of this web site once stated, religion:

...promotes both good and evil. Historically, it has helped to abolish
slavery.
It has promoted racial integration, equal rights for women,
and equal
rights for gays and lesbians. It has motivated individuals to
create massive support services for the poor, the sick, the
hurting, and the broken. Conversely, it has been used to justify slavery, racial segregation,
oppression of women, discrimination against homosexuals, genocide,
extermination of minorities, and other horrendous
evils.

Religion drives some to dedicate their lives to help
the poor and needy. (e.g. Gandhi, Albert Schweitzer, Mother Teresa.) It drives others to exterminate as many "heretics" as they
can. Consider the mass murders and genocides in Bosnia, East Timor, India, Korea,
Kosovo,
the Middle East, Northern Ireland, Philippines, Sri Lanka, Sudan, Tibet, etc.

Religion has the capability of generating unselfish love in some people, and
vicious, raw hatred in others.

Some would argue that religion has historically had such a major influence, both
for good and for evil, that it must be taught in the public schools. Otherwise,
the next generation is destined to be ignorant of their heritage, and to repeat the errors of the past.

References:

The following information sources were used to prepare and update the above
essay. The hyperlinks are not necessarily still active today.